Cargando…
One size does not fit all: Customizing MCMC methods for hierarchical models using NIMBLE
Improved efficiency of Markov chain Monte Carlo facilitates all aspects of statistical analysis with Bayesian hierarchical models. Identifying strategies to improve MCMC performance is becoming increasingly crucial as the complexity of models, and the run times to fit them, increases. We evaluate di...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7069319/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32184989 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.6053 |
_version_ | 1783505756750872576 |
---|---|
author | Ponisio, Lauren C. de Valpine, Perry Michaud, Nicholas Turek, Daniel |
author_facet | Ponisio, Lauren C. de Valpine, Perry Michaud, Nicholas Turek, Daniel |
author_sort | Ponisio, Lauren C. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Improved efficiency of Markov chain Monte Carlo facilitates all aspects of statistical analysis with Bayesian hierarchical models. Identifying strategies to improve MCMC performance is becoming increasingly crucial as the complexity of models, and the run times to fit them, increases. We evaluate different strategies for improving MCMC efficiency using the open‐source software NIMBLE (R package nimble) using common ecological models of species occurrence and abundance as examples. We ask how MCMC efficiency depends on model formulation, model size, data, and sampling strategy. For multiseason and/or multispecies occupancy models and for N‐mixture models, we compare the efficiency of sampling discrete latent states vs. integrating over them, including more vs. fewer hierarchical model components, and univariate vs. block‐sampling methods. We include the common MCMC tool JAGS in comparisons. For simple models, there is little practical difference between computational approaches. As model complexity increases, there are strong interactions between model formulation and sampling strategy on MCMC efficiency. There is no one‐size‐fits‐all best strategy, but rather problem‐specific best strategies related to model structure and type. In all but the simplest cases, NIMBLE's default or customized performance achieves much higher efficiency than JAGS. In the two most complex examples, NIMBLE was 10–12 times more efficient than JAGS. We find NIMBLE is a valuable tool for many ecologists utilizing Bayesian inference, particularly for complex models where JAGS is prohibitively slow. Our results highlight the need for more guidelines and customizable approaches to fit hierarchical models to ensure practitioners can make the most of occupancy and other hierarchical models. By implementing model‐generic MCMC procedures in open‐source software, including the NIMBLE extensions for integrating over latent states (implemented in the R package nimbleEcology), we have made progress toward this aim. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7069319 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70693192020-03-17 One size does not fit all: Customizing MCMC methods for hierarchical models using NIMBLE Ponisio, Lauren C. de Valpine, Perry Michaud, Nicholas Turek, Daniel Ecol Evol Original Research Improved efficiency of Markov chain Monte Carlo facilitates all aspects of statistical analysis with Bayesian hierarchical models. Identifying strategies to improve MCMC performance is becoming increasingly crucial as the complexity of models, and the run times to fit them, increases. We evaluate different strategies for improving MCMC efficiency using the open‐source software NIMBLE (R package nimble) using common ecological models of species occurrence and abundance as examples. We ask how MCMC efficiency depends on model formulation, model size, data, and sampling strategy. For multiseason and/or multispecies occupancy models and for N‐mixture models, we compare the efficiency of sampling discrete latent states vs. integrating over them, including more vs. fewer hierarchical model components, and univariate vs. block‐sampling methods. We include the common MCMC tool JAGS in comparisons. For simple models, there is little practical difference between computational approaches. As model complexity increases, there are strong interactions between model formulation and sampling strategy on MCMC efficiency. There is no one‐size‐fits‐all best strategy, but rather problem‐specific best strategies related to model structure and type. In all but the simplest cases, NIMBLE's default or customized performance achieves much higher efficiency than JAGS. In the two most complex examples, NIMBLE was 10–12 times more efficient than JAGS. We find NIMBLE is a valuable tool for many ecologists utilizing Bayesian inference, particularly for complex models where JAGS is prohibitively slow. Our results highlight the need for more guidelines and customizable approaches to fit hierarchical models to ensure practitioners can make the most of occupancy and other hierarchical models. By implementing model‐generic MCMC procedures in open‐source software, including the NIMBLE extensions for integrating over latent states (implemented in the R package nimbleEcology), we have made progress toward this aim. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-02-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7069319/ /pubmed/32184989 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.6053 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Ponisio, Lauren C. de Valpine, Perry Michaud, Nicholas Turek, Daniel One size does not fit all: Customizing MCMC methods for hierarchical models using NIMBLE |
title | One size does not fit all: Customizing MCMC methods for hierarchical models using NIMBLE |
title_full | One size does not fit all: Customizing MCMC methods for hierarchical models using NIMBLE |
title_fullStr | One size does not fit all: Customizing MCMC methods for hierarchical models using NIMBLE |
title_full_unstemmed | One size does not fit all: Customizing MCMC methods for hierarchical models using NIMBLE |
title_short | One size does not fit all: Customizing MCMC methods for hierarchical models using NIMBLE |
title_sort | one size does not fit all: customizing mcmc methods for hierarchical models using nimble |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7069319/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32184989 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.6053 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ponisiolaurenc onesizedoesnotfitallcustomizingmcmcmethodsforhierarchicalmodelsusingnimble AT devalpineperry onesizedoesnotfitallcustomizingmcmcmethodsforhierarchicalmodelsusingnimble AT michaudnicholas onesizedoesnotfitallcustomizingmcmcmethodsforhierarchicalmodelsusingnimble AT turekdaniel onesizedoesnotfitallcustomizingmcmcmethodsforhierarchicalmodelsusingnimble |